You know it's funny, I was reading posts from Islander yesterday before the truth came out and I was thinking, I can't tell the difference between these two people, Islander and Island Lover. Of course she will just lie, weasle and try to argue her way out of this, true to form.

Islander:
"I am just one person."

No question about that, there is just no way to figure out how many other different identities you post under. You are so bagged.:laugh:

Islander:

"The webmaster however, by linking me with a member that has a public identity, seems to have violated his own TOS. "

The webmaster pointed out three different identities to the same computer, you outed yourself under one of your identities. To try and turn this back on him is sleazy.


Islander:

"If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger!"


You have discredited yourself, try being honest for a change.

I know we all love a good conspiracy theory. But..

The webmaster never said same person, never said same computer, never said same home.

And how does any of that effect this piece of news?.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...dents_on_rise/

The article specifically states inexperience and alcohol as reasons for the rise in accidents.

One cable modem could be connected to a wireless router that a neighborhood could legally share and the IP address would be the same for all posts. It's quite possible that the three "islanders" are indeed three different people.

I knew he/they would use that one!
 

I figured Islander/Island Lover/Bear Islander would use that article.

In fact that article used national figures and the stats are from the New England states that DON'T require boating education. While the article did reveal those facts it was poorly written and easily missed.

Here are the boating accidents for Lake Winnipesaukee in 2006, the year the article used statistics from.

These stats were compiled by me using various media reports throughout the year and I broke out the figures for ONLY Winnipesaukee.

No stats from NH, where mandatory boating education is required for all but a few, were used in the article. The focus of the article was on the three states in New England where boater education is not mandated.

And, as a reference point. Massachusetts, which does not have a mandatory boater education law, does have a 45 mile an hour speed limit. What do marine law enforcement officials have to say?
Yep, Massachusetts has a speed limit but what they want is a mandatory boater education requirment. Interesting.

Also on the wish list:
So the border state that has what WinnFabs wants, speed limits, wants what NH has, mandatory boater education.

It doesn't.

Why?

Wrong state.

Go to Maine and lobby its Legislature for a speed limit if the situation there stresses you.

You did it to yourself and now you feel the need to blame another for your choice in life.

He never said you weren't either.

Funny thing is I have asked before and will ask again right here.

Are you the same person or are you not? If not are you all from the same house?

You have the opportunity to clear things up with the truth.

Are you going to come clean or let the speculation continue?

I guess it really doesn't matter because your credibility is sunk now.

I'm sure some hacker could let us know the answers we seek anyway.

Funny how a few months back I accused Islander and Island Lover of being the same person. The lack of response at that time said enough for me.

Anyone have any D-Con handy???

Lets face it, the end result of a speed limit being broken in a fatal accident will tag on a $50 or so ticket to the offender, the life would still be lost. I hope their fight to get a speed limit is worth it to them in the end, although I think the overall effect will be minimal.

and if the speeding boat stays 150' away from other vessels there won't be an accident. go figure. ;)

I thought I answered it already. But for the record I am one person. I have posted under another name in the past but at this time I am only Islander.

I am surprised there are 3 people using this ip, I would have thought 5 or 6.

You are correct in that it really doesn't matter, nor does the credibility of a online identity.

I have now answered more than I need to, or you have any right to know. The webmaster has not canceled or suspended my membership. If I am acceptable to him I don't need to justify myself to anyone else. I am through posting on this subject, If you have any more complaints address them to the webmaster.

Follow-up
 

I just wanted to add that I have been contacted and assured that the three members are in fact different people. The explanation was reasonable and I have no reason to doubt it. I appreciate that many of you nice people gave them the benefit of the doubt.

Was the other Identity you were posting under Island Lover and if not what was the other identity you were posting under?

Would you also like to let us know that you are the person quoted in the newspaper article speaking on behalf of Winfabs?

A special thanks to the webmaster for helping us clarify what has been speculated upon here in the forum and privately.

can you comment whether or not they are from the same house or does metrocast actually use one modem in an entire neighborhood? i find it odd that metrocast would set up an entire neighborhood with one single modem/ IP address. the only way possible is for a strong wireless connection. at the very least, they all certainly know each other and these comments aren't from a random group of strangers all agreeing with each other.

Same ip
 

Metrocast and all the other providers do not set up a whole neighborhood with one IP. The cable modem to a residence gets the ip... those connected to that modem through a wireless router.. all use the same ip when connecting to the internet... so you can hook up a wireless router and those PCs within range of it can hop on to the internet.. this is what all the fuss is about when setting up your home network... you need to put security on it to prevent your neighbors and unsavory characters from using your connection... Of course you can give the security info to your neighbors to let them do the same... The three posters absolutely can be different households or different people in the same household.. and in some cases... one poster might have an opinion to express and use the other poster to help edit the writing so as to be more coherent... hence the similar writing styles.

I know a few people who do that.. so lighten up folks!!

IG

i read it that you were saying that metrocast set you up this way, my mistake.

i understand how wireless routers/hubs/firewalls work. but i also understand that it doesn't travel very far and the three of you are in very close proximity to each other, most likely next door neighbors; certainly no more than a few hundred yards away from each other.

and please, don't PM me again; i'm not interested.

I said same neighborhood in my first post on the subject.

You apparently do not understand how "routers/hubs/firewalls" work because your assumptions are incorrect. I offered you a full explanation but you are "not interested".

So live in ignorance.

you just aren't nice at all are you?

I've been using the internet for 20 years, before web browsers, before windows (when gopher servers were used to navigate around the internet). i am well aware of what a firewall is, how it is used and how the 54,000+ ports of a tcp/ip stack are used and secured.

you sent me a PM accusing me of trying to find out who you are. trust me, that wouldn't be that hard.

you wrote something that didn't make sense to me (like many of your posts) and i was questioning what didn't make sense.

if living in ignorance means i don't have to listen to your convoluted explanation of how the internet works, i can live with that.

Question about "Cigarette - style - Boats"
 

It's clear to me that the Speed Limit crowd is trying to "cleanse" the lake of the so-called "Cigarette Style boats, which is their real reason for pushing the speed limit agenda. These types of boats include, but are not limited to, Cigarette, Fountain, Formula, Baja, etc. I think they could care less if a Jet Ski, Jet Boat, Bow Rider or Cruiser exceeds 45 mph, but they do care if it's a performance boat. Here's my question: Do you feel that the majority of performance boats are owned by:

1) People with waterfront or water access property that just use their boats for day boating?

or

2) People that keep the boat on the lake for the entire season and either sleep on their boats or just use it for day boating?

or

3) People that just bring their boat to the lake for the day and then leave?

In my opinion, the majority will be option 1 or 2 - not 3. Therefore, if the speed limit is eventually passed in some way, shape or form (which I highly doubt) these so-called performance boats are not going to leave the lake any time soon. I think the Speed Limit crowd will be in for a sorry, rude awakening if they think that they'll succeed in cleansing the lake of performance boats, as I believe they are attempting to do under the guise of "safety".

I believe these boats are owned by


4) People that do not understand or do not care that their boat is to big, to fast, to powerful, to polluting, to dangerous, to noisy and cause to much erosion to be in a lake like Winnipesaukee



Some of these things are also true of PWC's but not all.

I have been told, but do not know if it is true, that Winni is one of the few municipal water supplies that allow unrestricted speed or horsepower. Anybody know about that?

Islander et al wrote:
So it's true! The ultimate goal of WinFabs and folks like you is to eliminate these boats from a 72 Square Mile lake! You paying attention in Concord? It has nothing to do with speed (which statistics show is not an issue in accidents on Winnipesaukee).

Islander et al also wrote:
Municipal water supplies in my neck of the woods also ban swimming :eek: Maybe you should be pushing for that as well since humans are a major source of pollution!

Funny thing is you do not mention the very large cruisers that are here and new ones are arriving every day. These large cruisers burn as much gas while cruising under the proposed speed limit. They are quite powerful, as it takes alot of power to push a 10,000 to 25,000 lb boat through the water at any speed. They deliver the largest wake of any boat on the lake, which undoubtedly causes more erosion than any go-fast boat ever could ever dream of. Last but not least, I would bet a fair amount of their skippers would rather not go to a pump-out station and deal with the dirty job of pumping them out, so when out in the broads the flip that little hidden switch and send all their waste into the water.
Ever wonder why the people of Squam Lake have passed an ordinance with NHDES to not allow boats with heads on board to operate on that lake?

She won't respond, she just sticks to her agenda.

What you believe and what is really true...
 

Well Islander... Your ususal rose colored view glasses are shining once again and you have managed to share your one-sided convoluted opinon of boats in general...

WHO... Let me say it again... WHO decides or WHO knows what boats (if any) are too big, too fast, too powerful, too dangerous, too noisy, etc.??? (by the way the correct usage of the word TOO is spelled with 2 O's) - I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK IT'S YOU...

Face it... There are countless sizes, style, shapes, colors, lengths, horsepower, etc... of boats and NO ONE specific style is ever going to go away...

Variety is the spice of life and that is why there are so many choices of boats... There is something out there for everyone (except maybe you)...

America in general, and New Hampshire more specifically, is LIVE, FREE, or DIE... Until that changes, I will have whatever kind of boat I WANT TO...

OR 5) Boat owners who believe they are well within their rights to operate their boat (which they bought legally) on a lake where there are no restrictions.

Wireless is not the only way to go. Cat5 run house to house works great and you can run 350 feet to a router then 350 feet to the next router. You can amplify the line 8 times. Therefore a one dimensional network expanding in two directions can connect 17 homes over a maximum distance of 5,600 feet. That is over a mile. If you figure a three dimensional network using 1 in 4 out routers the maximum number of homes is 16,387 and if there routers have wireless capability the answer is astronomical. All using 1 ip of the satellite.

But even island residents are not that energetic. However there have been several large size networks set up on the island. I am told some of the equipment that was used on Bear has been taken to Rattlesnake now that Bear is getting connected to cable.

Seems like you are targeting the wrong type of boat...
 

[QUOTE=Islander]I believe these boats are owned by


4) People that do not understand or do not care that their boat is to big, to fast, to powerful, to polluting, to dangerous, to noisy and cause to much erosion to be in a lake like WinnipesaukeeQUOTE]

...if what you say here is true. Why is it so hard to just come out and state your real agenda, rather than try to hide behind it? Also, please tell me how a performance boat causes too (too with two o's) much erosion? I'll never believe that one in a million years.

It has been said that high performance boats don't have large wakes. I live just outside a no wake zone. In my experience the largest wake, larger than the Mount Washington's, is caused by a performance boat starting out. The horsepower expended in getting up on plane is enormous, and creates the largest wake on the lake.

I believe the pro speed limit community has explained its agenda many times. It is summarized in #4.

Just for the record,Seaplane Pilot is very concerned about shoreline erosion.I was just at his place and he just spent a considerable amount of money to fix and raise his perched beach which has been beaten up by large wakes.He just built the first wall a short few years ago.He also started the thread "Wakeup? no Wake down!".And finally he does not own a Performance boat or a boat capable of doing much more than 45 mph.While he is a friend,he does not know I'm posting this.

B R posted some questions about me. I contacted her privately to attempt to answer them. In her response I was told in part

"don't bother messaging me. you are rude and obnoxious."

"as usual, you only speak half truths."

"don't bother me again. you people make me sick."


She then posted online

"you just aren't nice at all are you?"

Obviously B R has an agenda. That, and her instructions, is why I no longer respond.


Uncle Fun - The answer is ME. I decide which boats are to big, to fast etc. this is America and I will support any legislation I want. I believe you are entitled to your opinion. Why do you deny me mine? Live Free or Die cuts both ways.

chipj29 and Uncle Fun - You can have any kind of boat you want AT THIS TIME. That will change when horsepower limits are signed into law. Then you will be required to obey the law like everyone else.

Bear Islander, you are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine. I have a home near an area (Dockham Shore) where a lot of cruisers come and go from and I'll tell you that these cruiser take-off wakes are exponentially bigger than any wake I have ever seen from a performance boat take off. See the earlier post by SikSukr - he has seen the damage and erosion first hand caused not by performance boats, but by cruisers.

ISLANDER: Apparently this is your SOAPBOX and Platform... Too bad it falls on a lot of deaf ears... Maybe you should run for State Rep. - get elected (not likely) - and then introduce some legislation which would only get voted down anyway... I NEVER said that I was denying you your opinons - but have some substance to back up your MISCONCEPTIONS about size, horsepower, etc...

By the way... Do you know something that the rest of us don't about horsepower limits??? There will NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER be horsepower restrictions... If a speed limit is not going to fly, than what makes you think horsepower limits are the answer??? How much horsepower does the Mt. Washington have??? Where do you think this regulation is going to come from??? Do you think the boat manufacturers will not build or sell boats with the largest horsepower allowed by the USCG and the NMMA (U.S. Coast Guard and National Marine Manufacturers Association)... Do you think the boat dealers will not sell any horsepower that a buyer wants to purchase??? Do you think the Marine Patrol will pull over a boat and ask to look 'under the hood' so-to-speak to check out how much horsepower a boat has... MOST engines do not even have any indication of how much horsepower they have -only the displacement typically... Horsepower has NO RELATION to wake size and practically no bearing on overall speed - because the bigger a boat is the more horsepower it needs to push it along - although it doesn't necessarily mean it will go faster!

You can have your opinions... I am not denying you that... Just try to make them not so extreme and more along the main stream... It's those extremist views coupled with proposed restrictions that are trying to make the lake user un-friendly - Fortunately, it will never work!!! Remember... Live, Free, or Die is not - Live, Free, or Die, except as outlined by the following restrictions... :patriot:

This topic is getting explosive!
 

I suggest we contact Jerry Springer and move it to his show! :D

I believe the folks that are Pro speed limit are doing it for the wrong reasons....
 

Let's face it, there's no speeding issue on Lake Winni. Look at the accident stats and get out on the lake for a day....speeding just isn't an issue. The 150ft violations? HUGE issue there and I really wish there was more ticketing related to that! Winnfabs thought they had it in the bag last year, then they thought they had it in the bag this year...all to no avail. We'll see about next years boating season but the number of opposers is growing immensely as the true facts are uncovered. I don't think any of the high performance boats are going ANYWHERE because I agree most of them live on or rent slips at the lake. Also, have your checked the economy and real estate market lately? Um, nobody is gonna buy those boats or any property there over the next 1-2 years.

I honestly can't remember the last time I drove my boat over 50mph but I'd like the freedom to do so under the proper conditions. No matter which side wins or loses (and even IF a law is passed).... this fight will never go away and neither will performance boats.

It is incredible how you people can just ignore facts you don't like. An independent pole shows support for speed limits has grown from 66% to 78% among registered NH voters.

NO STATISTICS? There was a fatality a few years ago involving high speed craft on Winnipesaukee. There was a fatality this summer involving high speed craft on Winnipesaukee. There was a double fatality in Maine involving high speed craft that could just as easily happened on Winnipesaukee.

Four people dead in the area involving high speed craft is all the statistics I need.


If you think performance boats are not going to leave then the ones that say they will leave must be lying!

Even if they don't leave do you think they will buy new ones when the current boat gets old? Obviously not!

At least one Marina on the lake has stopped selling high performance boats already. They must see the writing on the wall.

I guess I missed the fatality on Winnipeasukee this year. The fatality you mention a few years back involved a boat that wasn't speeding.

The one in Maine was with a craft that was a sitting in the dark(most agree) and could easily have happened if the boat was traveling 30mph or even less.

See now your twisting the facts by making is sound like it
 

was speed that caused any of those accidents....which is was not. I believe the accident reconstruction from the death a few years back put the 'high speed craft' at a whopping 27mph....not to mention he was intoxicated AND hit a boat that had no lights on at night. We are all saddened by that accident but it's not grounds for a speed limit. This is the exact behavior I'm referring to. I actually have the 2006 USCG stats (freshly published)....Here's some info...read em and weep:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Unlike many states, the number of boat registration in NH is up slightly. Nationally, registrations have declined 2%.

two-thirds of all fatal boating accidents were drownings and nearly 90% of those were not wearing a PFD!

Alcohol was a contributing factor in 1 out of 5 accidents.

Skier mishap was the most common (22) boating accident in NH . . . collisions with fixed objects was next with 9 accidents. There were a grand total of 8 boat-to-boat collisons and according to the NH Marine Patrol, none of those 8 collisions involved a speed over 30 mph.

And interestingly, about 90% of the NH accidents involved boats under 25ft in length.

Get The Facts Straight First....
 

ISLANDER... Again and Again after I read your posts, I realize just how out of touch you are and how you distort your words to suit your cause... HIGH SPEED BOATS ARE NOT THE CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS - just as SPEED IS NOT THE CAUSE of most accidents...

Here is some info that may set your thinking straight... Then again, I must be dreaming... NOTHING will change your liberal and irrational views... Even this info:

Talk about ignoring facts you don't like................

***Speed is not a leading cause of boating accidents on New Hampshire lakes and rivers, and boat accidents have declined sharply, according to Coast Guard records examined by The Telegraph. (nh.com Feb 4, 2006)

Operator inexperience and inattention easily swamp speeding as a cause of accidents in the state, according to a Telegraph review of the Coast Guard’s Recreational Boating Accident Database for 1999-2004. Inexperience and inattention were blamed for 120 accidents; hazardous waters, 55 accidents; no proper lookout, 39; excessive speed, 35; the weather 28; careless/reckless operation, 24; machinery or equipment failure, 23.

Other causes were passenger/skier behavior, 16; sharp turn, 16; obstructed vision, 13; alcohol use, 8; congested waters, 6; improper loading, 6; wake, 5; improper anchoring, 3; improper boat lights, 3; overloading, 3; standing/sitting on bow, 3; rules-of-road infraction, 3; hull failure, 1; and unfamiliar waters, 1.

Boating accidents with injury or serious property damage declined by 68 percent from 1999-2004 in New Hampshire, the records show. The state began mandatory boater education in 2002. Across the nation, boating accidents fell by 38 percent during the same years. Deaths also declined, from six in 1999 to only two in 2004, the latest year available.

The number of reported accidents fell from 109 in 1999 to 94 in 2000, 74 in 2001, 68 in 2002 when mandatory boater education began, 49 in 2003, and 35 in 2004. That’s a decline of 68 percent over five years.***

SO... AS YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE... High Speed Performance Boats and even Speed are not the leading causes of accidents... Because a fatality involves a high speed craft does not mean that A) the high speed craft itself caused the accident. 2) Speed caused the accident. 3) There should be a blanket ban on high speed boats because you think they are involved in the most accidents... That is like saying we should outlaw Toyotas because they cause or are involved in the most accidents in this state... I don't know if that is true - I am trying to show a point here... Now I personally don't own a high speed boat, but you have to agree facts are facts... You have your facts and I have mine... The only difference is that I don't distort my facts to suit my agenda...

You are oblivious to tandem thoughts and justify your reasoning for your own self center. You know nothing about me and yet you choose to catorgorize me in general. You are so far from the truth, it sickens me.

Are You Reading This Concord???
 

It it not speed these folks are trying to ban, it's boats capable of speed!

Islander wrote
Note the wording HIGH SPEED CRAFT not accidents involved high speed because the accidents didn't involve speed over the limits being proposed!

Also note that the author had to go back several years to find an accident involving a HIGH SPEED CRAFT that involved alcohol, not speed, and had to point to an accident from another state where boater education is not required even to make the above statement!

CONCORD, this is a blatant attempt to outlaw an entire class of boat, and with it an entire class of people, from Lake Winnipesaukee.

As the data that the Marine Patrol was collecting will likely show, speed on Lake Winnipesaukee is NOT A PROBLEM, violation of the 150' rule IS!

To add to the discussion among your colleagues in Concord ask yourself and them, why did the folks who initially called for a speed limit REALLY throw down a roadblock to prevent two pilot speed limits on the lake?
Because they know that the data will show SPEED IS NOT A PROBLEM ON LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE!

Wow, you guys sure are time consuming.

yes, you can have networks with as many people as you want on them (ever heard of a university) that can even travel to other countries. i'm not disputing that.

what i am disputing is your notion that metrocast set up your neighborhood with a single ip address. this is against fcc regulations and i'll tell you why.

metrocast needs to be able to supply data to federal and local authorities should the need arise. an example would be suspected terrorists activity, downloading inappropriate material from the internet.... if the fbi calls metrocast and asks who is at xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx ip address, they need to be able to identify the household, not the neighborhood. if the fcc allowed connections like you're trying to tell me you have, there wouldn't be any accountability for anyone's internet activity; and we know this is not the case.

so i'll stand by my statement that you are not all hooked up to one cable modem, that at the most you are sharing a wireless internet connection that's probably got a reach of 100 yards.

no matter how many times you say it, 1+1 will never equal anything else but 2. you can say it equals 3 as many times as you want; it will not change the facts.

btw: 1) you can run 600' between routers and 2) no one in my department has ever heard of a three dimensional network. did you make that up? 3) multiport routers aren't used that much anymore; most people these days use layer 5 switches. i have some that have 48 ports on them; would that be a 48th dimensional network??? WOW, that's sounds really cool. i didn't know i had one of those.